The long thread speculating about the Tech das really whetted my appetite; now I have had the chance of a thorough listen against some other world class decks. I'l try to give a brief outline of the findings.
Four of us listened for a long day; the decks where the Air Force One, fitted with HRS base, vacuum and Durand 12inch arm. The cartridges were two matched Koetsu blue lace stone bodied units with diamond Cantilevers. The rest of the equipment was at the top end, capable of showing what was going on, easily.
let me say that this is not a 'review' so much as an account of what we heard and felt, listening in a relaxed manner.
The decks we compared with the AF1 were a top level Continuum , an SME 30-12, and a year 2000, Rockport Sirius 111.
First off; all four decks were very fine. In that sense there was no obvious 'loser' or a deck which under performed. They seemed to fall naturally into two groups, the Rockport and the three others. Frankly, the Rockport sounded the most 'different' in an unexpected way. It had less obvious presence, a more relaxed presentation, compared to the others. All four of us felt it was the most 'invisible' of the decks, the one which least interfered with the business of playing music. We all loved it, although those seeking a more 'hi fi' form of presentation might have been less impressed. At this level, personal taste is all.Given that the Rockport is no longer made, and given that its cost would hughly exceed that of the other decks, it simply served as an interesting contrast, and an indication of what could be achieved.
The other three decks sounded reasonably similar, although the differences mattered. The best was the Continuum, which sounded rich, with a markedly powerful bass and an overall smoothness.very seductive. The Tech das, even with the Durand 12inch, was a bit more upbeat and analytic. Lots of detail, a fast pace, good focus and a pleasing silence between notes. This deck would most please those who welcome a more upbeat sound with a slight emphasis on detail.No doubt a graham arm would sound different. The deck sounded quieter with the vacuum in operation. The build quality was fully up to the mark, although we would have preferred a smaller footprint....the AF1 needs a huge table! Overall, I think it fair to say that there was broad agreement that the air Force 1 is a top rank deck, but we also felt it was a 'work in progress' which might benefit from further development. But be in no doubt, this is a fine piece of work.
I own an SME 30-12 so didn't take part in the evaluation of this unit, because of possible bias. The other three thought it extremely good, but very slightly lacking in ultimate refinement compared with the others. Given that it cost about a third of the AF 1 (in the UK) it was felt to have done very well indeed . It was no 'also ran'....all these decks are stars, which one suits will depend on personal taste and budget.
While auditioning we made notes, but avoided remarking on the performance of the decks. But when we compared notes, there was a surprising degree of agreement. If we had to give scores, it would have gone something along the lines of ; Rockport: 10, Continuum: 8.5, AF1: 8, SME: 7.5. These are 'tough' scores because personal taste will vary so much. We would not claim they are in any way 'definitive'. But they are the result of careful listening using seriously high-end equipment. No doubt others, with different tastes, using different cartidges and so, might have felt differently. As I said at the start, there are no winners or losers.
Well, that's an honest account, the best we can do.
NB: One obvious point....three of these decks were designed as complete entities, with arms built specially to match the decks. Only the AF1 does not come with a purpose designed arm, built by the manufacturer of the deck. How much this matters is unclear to me.
Four of us listened for a long day; the decks where the Air Force One, fitted with HRS base, vacuum and Durand 12inch arm. The cartridges were two matched Koetsu blue lace stone bodied units with diamond Cantilevers. The rest of the equipment was at the top end, capable of showing what was going on, easily.
let me say that this is not a 'review' so much as an account of what we heard and felt, listening in a relaxed manner.
The decks we compared with the AF1 were a top level Continuum , an SME 30-12, and a year 2000, Rockport Sirius 111.
First off; all four decks were very fine. In that sense there was no obvious 'loser' or a deck which under performed. They seemed to fall naturally into two groups, the Rockport and the three others. Frankly, the Rockport sounded the most 'different' in an unexpected way. It had less obvious presence, a more relaxed presentation, compared to the others. All four of us felt it was the most 'invisible' of the decks, the one which least interfered with the business of playing music. We all loved it, although those seeking a more 'hi fi' form of presentation might have been less impressed. At this level, personal taste is all.Given that the Rockport is no longer made, and given that its cost would hughly exceed that of the other decks, it simply served as an interesting contrast, and an indication of what could be achieved.
The other three decks sounded reasonably similar, although the differences mattered. The best was the Continuum, which sounded rich, with a markedly powerful bass and an overall smoothness.very seductive. The Tech das, even with the Durand 12inch, was a bit more upbeat and analytic. Lots of detail, a fast pace, good focus and a pleasing silence between notes. This deck would most please those who welcome a more upbeat sound with a slight emphasis on detail.No doubt a graham arm would sound different. The deck sounded quieter with the vacuum in operation. The build quality was fully up to the mark, although we would have preferred a smaller footprint....the AF1 needs a huge table! Overall, I think it fair to say that there was broad agreement that the air Force 1 is a top rank deck, but we also felt it was a 'work in progress' which might benefit from further development. But be in no doubt, this is a fine piece of work.
I own an SME 30-12 so didn't take part in the evaluation of this unit, because of possible bias. The other three thought it extremely good, but very slightly lacking in ultimate refinement compared with the others. Given that it cost about a third of the AF 1 (in the UK) it was felt to have done very well indeed . It was no 'also ran'....all these decks are stars, which one suits will depend on personal taste and budget.
While auditioning we made notes, but avoided remarking on the performance of the decks. But when we compared notes, there was a surprising degree of agreement. If we had to give scores, it would have gone something along the lines of ; Rockport: 10, Continuum: 8.5, AF1: 8, SME: 7.5. These are 'tough' scores because personal taste will vary so much. We would not claim they are in any way 'definitive'. But they are the result of careful listening using seriously high-end equipment. No doubt others, with different tastes, using different cartidges and so, might have felt differently. As I said at the start, there are no winners or losers.
Well, that's an honest account, the best we can do.
NB: One obvious point....three of these decks were designed as complete entities, with arms built specially to match the decks. Only the AF1 does not come with a purpose designed arm, built by the manufacturer of the deck. How much this matters is unclear to me.
Last edited:
